Recently, the following "Reader's Rant" was published in our local paper:
Cupcakes and paranoia By ERIKA C. H.
I KNOW that something as minor as cupcakes should not set me off. However, today I am angry about cupcakes. Actually, I am angry that beautiful homemade strawberry cupcakes with homemade icing that I stayed up until midnight last night baking for my son’s class were rejected by his teacher and his school.
Let’s be clear about one thing. The cupcake debacle was completely my fault. I had heard rumors about home-baked goodies not being allowed in school. There was something in the school handbook about it as well. However, I made them anyway because he could at least share them after school should my baked goods be deemed unworthy, dangerous and illicit by Big Brother.
Sadly, the beautiful cupcakes were, in fact, declared contraband.
The no-baked-goods rule makes absolutely no sense on many levels. In fact, those who support this silly rule are, in large part, the same people who feel that the government is in essence an extension of their parents, an entity with little to no appreciation for individual thinking skills.
I’ve heard the baked goods rule supported with a variety of arguments, including children’s safety, particularly that homemade treats might contain peanut products and harm children with peanut allergies.
How certain are we that the prepackaged nasty junk in the bakery aisle at the local grocery is devoid of peanut products? And are we sure that the junky sausage dogs and other nastiness that our children are fed in the school lunchroom are free of peanut products? What about the pizza dough at Bingo last May?
Given the proclivity in our society for selectively following rules according to convenience, it would somehow not surprise me to find out this rule isn’t enforced universally. Moreover, if exclusion of the child with the peanut allergy is an issue, then there is a simple solution. The parent providing the birthday treat could provide a separate treat for the child with the allergy. My mother used to do it for the diabetic kids in our classes. Perhaps we have just become too lazy to talk to other parents or teachers to find out these things.
Why are we continually catering to groups in the minority? Is it right to make everyone suffer because of one or two people? And why are we making broad rules to respond to isolated incidents?
I can remember years ago hearing about people putting razor blades and other assorted objects into candy and goodies for children. Perhaps the next time someone stubs a toe on a doorway we should ban doorways, too. Such policies contribute to the culture of paranoia and fear we are breeding into our children. Creating that culture only infantilizes children, makes them scared of their own shadow and prevents them from taking risks.
One more thing. I find it quite interesting that in December, during holiday party time, we received an e-mail asking for cupcakes for the classroom holiday party. I guess the cupcake rule is reserved for select people and events.
I’m not in that clique, but I have no problem with it. I’ve never been the clique type.
Some of you know, my 7 year old Small Fry has food allergies. This letter ticked me off on many, many levels. So I took a deep breath, took a week, and wrote this response. I hope they publish it. EDUCATION is KEY!
While I can appreciate Ms. XXX frustration – after all, she had very good intentions of providing a nice treat for her child and her child’s classroom – it appears her “reader’s rant” was born of her frustration and anger rather than based in fact. Interestingly enough, she even acknowledges knowing in advance of the rule of “no homemade goods” but made her cupcakes anyway.
The fact is, the schools are not “catering to groups in the minority” and “everyone” is not “suffering because of one or two people.” Approximately 12 million people in the U.S. have food allergies. That’s one in 25, or 4% of the population. Food allergies are more prevalent among young children – one in 17 under the age of 3 has food allergies.* Ms. XXX equated keeping allergens out of the schools to “taking away a child’s freedom to take risks” – and equation I cannot support. Eating for food allergic children is not just a risk taking activity. The fact is, allergies are potentially life-threatening. Anaphylaxis is a severe allergic reaction that is rapid in onset, and can cause death. Equating such reactions to a stubbed toe is preposterous and alarming. I don’t call that “paranoia” on the part of the schools – I call that proper judicious conduct that takes into account the welfare of all their students, regardless of disability. I don’t call that “suffering” – I call that learning compassion for those who are different. It’s hard enough to have to tell our children they cannot have the same treats as their friends without having to worry about when we are not present to protect them – having friends (and their parents) who are aware of the dangers around them can save their very lives.
Also, Ms. XXX appears to have focused on peanut allergies without taking into to account that there are many, many foods that cause allergic reactions. In fact, eight foods account for 90% of all food-allergic reactions. They are milk, egg, peanut, tree nuts, fish, shellfish, wheat, and soy. And don’t forget about gluten and strawberries – both of which were probably present in her cupcakes.
Finally, let’s look beyond food allergies – look at the current preponderance of obesity in children today - almost 60% of children in America are obese. The rate of overweight children in America is increasing rapidly. Instead of baked goods, why don’t we celebrate birthdays with non-food items?
So instead of reacting out of hurt feelings and frustration, please, for the sake of all of our children, educate yourself on the facts of food allergies first and help us protect them from harm. In this case, a cupcake really can kill. Is that worth your feelings?
*Source: http://www.foodallergy.org/section/about-food-allergy
Posts
